Theme: Operationalism

You don’t know that your genes are speaking out of self defensive panic. I know mine are speaking. But then, scientific (operational) truth is in in my genetic interest. Technically speaking we cannot measure IQ reliably above 140. What we can do however, is group people in a distribution above 140 – and that appears to work fairly accurately. (Although, we tend to specialize in certain categories of thought.) EQ is pseudoscience. All demonstrated intelligence increases and decreases constantly. The difference between our behaviors is easily measurable and attributable to personality differences (values). In particular some people have higher or lower agreeableness and conscientiousness, and higher or lower neuroticism – and higher or lower agency as a consequence. Most of these differences are the result of what we call male(autistic) vs female(psychotic) brain structures developed in-utero (and possibly early post-partum) and at present we can measure them reasonably accurately. And each of those personality traits corresponds to variations in the (few) reward systems. And each of those reward systems corresponds to a phase of the prey drive. With the difference between the genders as significant biases. Now, if we add into this set of variables (a) sexual, (b) social, and (d) economic market values, we find that those that are more valuable almost always take conservative (asset preservation) strategies, while those less valuable with less agency take progressive (consumption) strategies. Now, whether someone’s opinion makes you feel offended, insecure, or inadequate, is simply your genes telling you that it’s true, and to change your social group to improve your market value. And no, I have no contempt for normies. But ALL OF US at the upper end, have developmental (Childhood) challenges growing up with ‘normies’ who tend to ostracize us, without realizing that (a) we must mature more slowly, and (b) they will inevitably end up working for us in one way or another. So the point of my post (and most posts I make on this topic) is that it an economic advantage to be gifted, but it is not necessarily one that makes you happier. In fact, the evidence continues to accumulate that the opposite is true. We are all victims of the normies so to speak: which is another way of saying that those of us who grasp history are doomed to be the victims of those who do not. Sorry. It’s that simple. (So I know your virtue signalling is self defensive, but that doesn’t make it any less obviously a lack of agency, and a failure to mature into adulthood. The purpose of the postmodern revolution was to relieve the infantilized mind of the pressures of competition in modernity when freed of the criticism that they were just poor. Unfortunately, the poor were poor deservedly, and the postmodern underclasses are still underclasses that can just spend money because their betters have made all consumer goods and services infinitely cheaper.) ——— IN RESPONSE TO—— —“Can you tell the difference between someone with and IQ of 145, and one at 165 just by speaking to them? Probably not. But you would notice a massive difference between the one that had the equivalent EQ, and the one without, very quickly. The difference I’ve observed in people of this mental make up is that there is almost a desperation to be noticed as smart in some, whereas, the truly intelligent people I know have no cares whether it’s noticed in them or not. They won’t correct someone, they won’t manoeuvre the conversation to walk into a topic so they can show off. They certainly won’t brag about it online. There is an underlying contentment, and confidence that appears in people like this. Or should I say “us”? I thought, perhaps, that I was reading into your post too much. The last paragraph, however, only signals a real contempt for the “normies”. You’re too busy “Se lancer des fleurs”, as the French say, to realise the only people that care about how smart you are are you, and your parents. Other people can appreciate it, but nobody really cares – especially on the internet. Here is something you can try. Why don’t you just swap the topic of your answer from intelligence, to physical attractiveness, and see how repulsively it would read. Maybe that will give you a hint as to why its an unbecoming way to carry yourself.”—

You don’t know that your genes are speaking out of self defensive panic. I know mine are speaking. But then, scientific (operational) truth is in in my genetic interest. Technically speaking we cannot measure IQ reliably above 140. What we can do however, is group people in a distribution above 140 – and that appears to work fairly accurately. (Although, we tend to specialize in certain categories of thought.) EQ is pseudoscience. All demonstrated intelligence increases and decreases constantly. The difference between our behaviors is easily measurable and attributable to personality differences (values). In particular some people have higher or lower agreeableness and conscientiousness, and higher or lower neuroticism – and higher or lower agency as a consequence. Most of these differences are the result of what we call male(autistic) vs female(psychotic) brain structures developed in-utero (and possibly early post-partum) and at present we can measure them reasonably accurately. And each of those personality traits corresponds to variations in the (few) reward systems. And each of those reward systems corresponds to a phase of the prey drive. With the difference between the genders as significant biases. Now, if we add into this set of variables (a) sexual, (b) social, and (d) economic market values, we find that those that are more valuable almost always take conservative (asset preservation) strategies, while those less valuable with less agency take progressive (consumption) strategies. Now, whether someone’s opinion makes you feel offended, insecure, or inadequate, is simply your genes telling you that it’s true, and to change your social group to improve your market value. And no, I have no contempt for normies. But ALL OF US at the upper end, have developmental (Childhood) challenges growing up with ‘normies’ who tend to ostracize us, without realizing that (a) we must mature more slowly, and (b) they will inevitably end up working for us in one way or another. So the point of my post (and most posts I make on this topic) is that it an economic advantage to be gifted, but it is not necessarily one that makes you happier. In fact, the evidence continues to accumulate that the opposite is true. We are all victims of the normies so to speak: which is another way of saying that those of us who grasp history are doomed to be the victims of those who do not. Sorry. It’s that simple. (So I know your virtue signalling is self defensive, but that doesn’t make it any less obviously a lack of agency, and a failure to mature into adulthood. The purpose of the postmodern revolution was to relieve the infantilized mind of the pressures of competition in modernity when freed of the criticism that they were just poor. Unfortunately, the poor were poor deservedly, and the postmodern underclasses are still underclasses that can just spend money because their betters have made all consumer goods and services infinitely cheaper.) ——— IN RESPONSE TO—— —“Can you tell the difference between someone with and IQ of 145, and one at 165 just by speaking to them? Probably not. But you would notice a massive difference between the one that had the equivalent EQ, and the one without, very quickly. The difference I’ve observed in people of this mental make up is that there is almost a desperation to be noticed as smart in some, whereas, the truly intelligent people I know have no cares whether it’s noticed in them or not. They won’t correct someone, they won’t manoeuvre the conversation to walk into a topic so they can show off. They certainly won’t brag about it online. There is an underlying contentment, and confidence that appears in people like this. Or should I say “us”? I thought, perhaps, that I was reading into your post too much. The last paragraph, however, only signals a real contempt for the “normies”. You’re too busy “Se lancer des fleurs”, as the French say, to realise the only people that care about how smart you are are you, and your parents. Other people can appreciate it, but nobody really cares – especially on the internet. Here is something you can try. Why don’t you just swap the topic of your answer from intelligence, to physical attractiveness, and see how repulsively it would read. Maybe that will give you a hint as to why its an unbecoming way to carry yourself.”—